From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id iCG1GXx+qV6LZgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 13:17:48 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id mFf8LIR+qV6ffgAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 13:17:56 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142::17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE833941909 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 13:17:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:37096 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTmb5-0008QM-OL for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 09:17:55 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34984) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTmWA-0001pM-J9 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 09:12:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTmW9-0008Uu-3c for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 09:12:50 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x72b.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::72b]:37543) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTmW8-0008Ud-7w for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 09:12:48 -0400 Received: by mail-qk1-x72b.google.com with SMTP id s63so1840867qke.4 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 06:12:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5U/1Q6DtpdlLLESgbm8jP0Hs2FCO4w5Nj/A4TTIs8u0=; b=Dk3NvhjVXUAM+AerhnK91HQrk1raEddQTJgJ5TAMJFkv9FqzeccqjqnMsHoQ5UcX6J Ha25w4GKRuNKaQXfh5ghjaxCENpJEQwx8n5hBlmpzrMD7nhlTuMXDxijMWT8e+qRCCfd 41EUMuTfeZA4kijAP5+UDKQabChngCs2Z4uIQvhI0MTycn3uJvnaehaByM1alpLnWIYF 7nGhe/A/q1eVGFLs6mKRTY2WDxCb9PhvmZZiEgmgr6BD7OCWVxp8LhiWA+GnYaN12zUs EG5UfvR48OmmpKju6o3e9ePW2TLPd9vmesdOFFN//GnAKbskZtZBkKi+G7Wv9mTX0deB +EeQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5U/1Q6DtpdlLLESgbm8jP0Hs2FCO4w5Nj/A4TTIs8u0=; b=XF+9AUIQkVtX9KnWZvV5PVWeTAZz57xzLkwsn5IuesuyPjQsU6tCkMosLDEMt4Tdgu 0QYKz63+rfSKiVAP6A7c6WdlsOg37S/gojXpsWxV4BF7QQ9Wt1G0wIezBawblkmYn+Ec hfCIy/3tlQkoFas6VlWi3ja4WbfinB3abHacSuYvYHlgj3a/TPweCO0vh89r3r6KZr3C v+3VXDIDcgsRjoZ1Yz8dPgN0hJXG+uGDMjGMI23O9q8bjer6Ye5J3pX5QaRgtGFTlpxT WAIieaP/VF1+8lv8MIhSweFYFbF9LG1oB5yCffMnF59ZYznR9dhv8WI5FwghQTyKKeGQ IiOg== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Pua4lGVA2bHWnorJ3VVzXWN+F0vl/IXiry9KMbIad4tDhdbL+8HN +g6mC5gCTnelt60jcogrsJJI7UPuLGJ2/3J2pO+6xQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLnyP07dlXl6ntyOJTeFIJesKO3cNe+TOVxpnwUYIUB1MBYBFjEnnLi6mxln6I9o/aJLyDC3iJNDwqsHYbI7jQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:239:: with SMTP id u25mr29408414qkm.304.1588165965450; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 06:12:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87a72ujwbq.fsf@elephly.net> In-Reply-To: <87a72ujwbq.fsf@elephly.net> From: zimoun Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 15:12:34 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: unexpected reproducibility of reproducible blog post? To: Ricardo Wurmus Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::72b; envelope-from=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com; helo=mail-qk1-x72b.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: [-] PROGRAM ABORT : Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). Location : parse_addr6(), p0f-client.c:67 X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4864:20::72b X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Guix Devel Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Scanner: scn0 X-Spam-Score: -0.71 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=Dk3NvhjV; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 2001:470:142::17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Scan-Result: default: False [-0.71 / 13.00]; GENERIC_REPUTATION(0.00)[-0.49327505704234]; DWL_DNSWL_FAIL(0.00)[gmail.com:server fail,2001:470:142::17:server fail]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2001:470:142::/48:c]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; IP_REPUTATION_HAM(0.00)[asn: 22989(0.18), country: US(-0.00), ip: 2001:470:142::17(-0.49)]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[gmail.com:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[gmail.com,none]; MX_GOOD(-0.50)[cached: eggs.gnu.org]; MAILLIST(-0.20)[mailman]; FORGED_RECIPIENTS_MAILLIST(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:22989, ipnet:2001:470:142::/48, country:US]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[larch=yhetil.org]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[gmail.com:s=20161025]; RCVD_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[6]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; URIBL_BLOCKED(0.00)[fastmail.net:email,elephly.net:email]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[zimontoutoune@gmail.com,guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[guix-devel@gnu.org]; HAS_LIST_UNSUB(-0.01)[]; DNSWL_BLOCKED(0.00)[2001:470:142::17:from]; FORGED_SENDER_MAILLIST(0.00)[] X-TUID: 504dEBCC2W5J Hi Ricardo, On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 at 14:44, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > > > Konrad Hinsen writes: > > > One question I have been wondering about is the possibility of grafts > > being an obstacle to reproducibility. Grafts are something I don't > > really understand yet, so I cannot answer this question. In particular, > > does a grafted package get a different hash from a package built with > > grafting disabled? > > Yes. > > A grafted package is a copy of the original package but with all > references to /gnu/store/AAAAAA-=E2=80=A6 replaced with /gnu/store/BBBBBB= -=E2=80=A6. > This is done recursively starting with the direct users of the > replaced package and for all users of those users. Could the grafts explain the mismatch reported before? Cheers, simon